Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BBC Subtitle Guidelines

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 88 posts

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#31

Post by gpvos »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered... when politicians give speeches they often have some hand gesturing from a sign language interpreter standing next to them. But I've never understood why this is better than subtitles. If you're deaf then wouldn't you rather read text than follow sign language?

Sign language is the native language for most deaf people, while subtitling is derived from spoken language which is usually their second language. Also you can express emotions better using it, similar to how it's easier to convey them using speech than using text.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#32

Post by jbms »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered... when politicians give speeches they often have some hand gesturing from a sign language interpreter standing next to them. But I've never understood why this is better than subtitles. If you're deaf then wouldn't you rather read text than follow sign language?

Sign language has a different grammar. At least in British Sign Language. Simplistically, put the object of the sentence first so it's clearer what's being talked about.

For someone who is profoundly deaf from birth and who can't lipread, the way we speak and write is a massive struggle. Cochlear implants before a year old are much more common now, while the brain is still more malleable, so there's maybe less and less deaf people who are totally profoundly deaf and you may not realise what it's like for them if you never come across them.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#33

Post by rozab »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered... when politicians give speeches they often have some hand gesturing from a sign language interpreter standing next to them. But I've never understood why this is better than subtitles. If you're deaf then wouldn't you rather read text than follow sign language?

As I understand it, BSL is a fully different language to spoken English, with different grammar and syntax. For someone whose 'first' language is BSL, reading subtitles is more like a second language, where meaning is not conveyed in the same way.

https://www.british-sign.co.uk/what-is-british-sign-language...

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#35

Post by fredoralive »

kvm000 wrote: post #22
zinekeller wrote: post #3

One of those big difference between UK subtitling and US captioning is the use of colo(u)r or the absence of it ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/forproducts/guides/subti... ), which I believe boils down to technological differences between television systems in the '80s. While the UK-developed teletext system is also available in NTSC (in fact CBC have deployed it), the US opted out to develope a separate captio…

In my experience with a few big broadcasters like Paramount (previously Viacom) and Discovery, for broadcast in Europe/UK the signal they generate often has a mix of Teletext and/or DVB inserted based on the channel since those signals are distributed to a LOT of partners like local satellite and cable companies who can decide which parts of the signal to map into their system. In that context, “teletext” just works…

I was under the impression the "teletext" style ones still used teletext encoding, not EIA-608? It's basically just a data steam containing a single page of teletext rather than a whole magazine? AFAIK Sky Digital uses this approach (at least for SD), with a more modern looking decoder, and it certainly has colour support at least[1].

[1] Although DVB can contain a full teletext stream that can be reinserted into the SD analogue VBI by the receiver. Sky boxes supported that so on some channels you could just go to ye olde page 888, although I haven't a clue if any channels still do that (I don't have an old SD Sky setup around to look).

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#36

Post by blowski »

crazygringo wrote: post #17
rwmj wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since I live with someone whose first language isn't English I basically watch everything with subtitles. And live subtitling - while it's a thing - isn't that good. Try turning on subtitles for something like a news programme or live broadcast and it'll usually be quite delayed, with lots of misspellings and even outright wrong text. (This is true for premier public broadcasters in the UK such as the BBC, I don't kn…

Sure, but the closed captioning is still extremely good. The typists use chorded keyboards for speed and yes they occasionally make mistakes but everything is generally quite clear and accurate. On the other hand, signing involves actual translation , not just transcription, which is much more likely to drop meaning or introduce confusion. Translation is already hard enough, and live translation is a whole other leve…

I'm not deaf, don't know any sign language, am not close friends with anyone who does.

However, I understand that it's much easier to be expressive in sign language. Non-verbal language used by the speaker - sarcasm, tone, inflection - either translate badly, or get lost entirely when transliterating into subtitles. A talented sign-language translator is able to carry this over much better.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#37

Post by camyule »

Seems as relevant a place as any to highlight the lack of support for subtitles in BBC iPlayer on AppleTV: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/help/questions/accessibility/a....

I work in a related industry so fully understand how these situations come to pass, but as a user it’s frustrating to say the least.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#38

Post by enkid »

crazygringo wrote: post #17
rwmj wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since I live with someone whose first language isn't English I basically watch everything with subtitles. And live subtitling - while it's a thing - isn't that good. Try turning on subtitles for something like a news programme or live broadcast and it'll usually be quite delayed, with lots of misspellings and even outright wrong text. (This is true for premier public broadcasters in the UK such as the BBC, I don't kn…

Sure, but the closed captioning is still extremely good. The typists use chorded keyboards for speed and yes they occasionally make mistakes but everything is generally quite clear and accurate. On the other hand, signing involves actual translation , not just transcription, which is much more likely to drop meaning or introduce confusion. Translation is already hard enough, and live translation is a whole other leve…

I don't know much about sign language. Does it use a different grammar from English?

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#39

Post by kvm000 »

zinekeller wrote: post #30
kvm000 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience with a few big broadcasters like Paramount (previously Viacom) and Discovery, for broadcast in Europe/UK the signal they generate often has a mix of Teletext and/or DVB inserted based on the channel since those signals are distributed to a LOT of partners like local satellite and cable companies who can decide which parts of the signal to map into their system. In that context, “teletext” just works…

To be fair, I'm talking about the old PAL-based teletext and not about DVB teletext. Also, computers are now everywhere so the 888 page can be inserted with minimal effort unlike back then that it requires coordination with different teams.

I was talking about the older PAL-based teletext as well - but you're right, I understand it was different in terms of equipment originally with the full-screen data feeds.

Separate from DVB, the old PAL OP42/47 teletext payload gets inserted into the MPEG-TS using SMPTE 2038[1] then when decoded, it would go into regular ancillary data of the uncompressed stream per ITU-R BT.1120-7[2].

The broadcast industry really loves standards[3].

[1] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7290549

[2] https://www.freetv.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/OP-42-C...

[3] https://xkcd.com/927

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#40

Post by kvm000 »

fredoralive wrote: post #35
kvm000 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience with a few big broadcasters like Paramount (previously Viacom) and Discovery, for broadcast in Europe/UK the signal they generate often has a mix of Teletext and/or DVB inserted based on the channel since those signals are distributed to a LOT of partners like local satellite and cable companies who can decide which parts of the signal to map into their system. In that context, “teletext” just works…

I was under the impression the "teletext" style ones still used teletext encoding, not EIA-608? It's basically just a data steam containing a single page of teletext rather than a whole magazine? AFAIK Sky Digital uses this approach (at least for SD), with a more modern looking decoder, and it certainly has colour support at least[1]. [1] Although DVB can contain a full teletext stream that can be reinserted into the…

That's correct - 608/708 is North America only, and UK/Europe could use OP42/47 teletext for simple captions (not whole magazine), and/or DVB (mostly language translation).
Post reply on HN